Council to ban kids over 8 from using opposite sex toilets!!! Sign this petition!!!

[Weemee]

Hi,

Glasgow City Council are proposing to change the parks management rules...I think in reaction to the problems had in the past with social media organised events. However, they are proposing (amongst other things):
-Children over the age of 8 may not use opposite sex toilets;
-that nurseries/ schools may not take children to the park without written permission from the director at the parks dept. and only once a charge has been paid;
-No congregation of more than 20 people without permission;
-No playing group sports (an intended legacy of a commonwealth games city?!?)
-No music;

There's a petition doing the rounds and an email to tell the council what we think. Seems to me a pretty heavy handed reaction to an incident from 3 years ago.....and one which will negatively impact upon everyone. Many inner city nurseries use the parks as many have little/ no outside space. It's not exactly promoting a health lifestyle either! Not the best legacy for a commonwealth games city!

If you agree this proposal is not what's needed there's an email address to the council directly and a petition here
Thanks for reading!

Haven't read whole thread but the only proposal I disagree with is that bicycles are restricted to 5mph and other vehicles to 10.

In the rare event of there being toilets in the park then over eight is fine.

I'm glad they're banning "professional" dog walkers, there is no way that someone with that many dogs on and off lead is picking up all the shit they generate. New dog rules in general good. Just wish they had the means to enforce them.

GCC has bugger all money. Why should business be allowed to use GCC assets to make money without paying GCC anything?

The educational thing is a bit odd, especially as they allow pond dipping but Imguessing they are trying to avoid outdoor nurseries being set up, without their knowledge. I'm sure any nursery that wanted to use the park would have no issue with permission. GCC has always been very accomadating in the past with Permission to Use requests.

This petition is ridiculous and hysterical and I would hope it would be ignored. If you actually live in Glasgow and have issues with the proposed changes actually make the effort to write to the council with reasoned objections ...

it's not about being threatened.

Nobody would feel threatened by a 9 year old boy. But many girls would be embarrassed. And so would many 9 year old boys. And there is no need for it.

"where it is normal practice for men to wave their penises about, "

Wow. So men are likely to think "oh, I've got my penis out to gave a pee - I'll just look round and see if there is an unaccompanied 9 year old boy I can rape before I put it away again"

I live in Glasgow and signed the petition because of the issues stated regarding nursery/ school usage. I didn't even realise there was anything about boys using women's toilets. I was going to post petition on my facebook page but I don't want people thinking that I'm one of those overprotective mums who sees a paedophile around every corner.

' is always going to be a higher risk place. So it is unsurprising that parents don't want their boys to be alone in the gents.'

It's not a 'higher risk place' though is it? Boys are far more likely to be abused at school, church, football practice, scouts, at a friends house or, most likely of all, at home.

It is surprising (to me at least) that so many parents are happy to believe that the gents are a 'higher risk place' when it so blatantly isn't true!

Ok perhaps I should've said 'unzip flies', the waving was poetic licence!

Thing is if you know your child isn't being abused at home/cubs etc, yes of course somewhere unsupervised is riskier than somewhere supervised. Statistically perhaps my child is at most risk at home, but in their actual real life, that's not true. Public loo IS the highest risk place for my DS I am sure of it. Because everywhere else someone is looking after him.

And if it is fine for boys with SN to use ladies, how do girls tell the difference and know when to be embarrassed?

Curlew if you were 'a bad guy' surely you would see a toilet with unaccompanied kids as providing more opportunity than, say, a library or wherever?

It is also worth noting that the opposite sex in toilets thing is not new it is in the current park rules

Dogs on leash/under close control is also in the current rules

No commercial activities in the park? already on the rules

No radios? already in the rules

Public loo IS the highest risk place for my DS I am sure of it. Because everywhere else someone is looking after him

Hmm. To be honest, I'd be more worried about the occasions when someone is "looking after him". The vast majority of abusers are known to their victims. This is much lower risk to an abuser than taking a chance in a public toilet with an known victim.

'Public loo IS the highest risk place for my DS I am sure of it'

Unless your DS is never looked after by anyone other than you, you are wrong. Children are far more likely to be abused by someone they know.

'Thing is if you know your child isn't being abused at home/cubs'

People don't know though do they....that's kind of the point?!

Think about it;

You're a pervert lurking in a toilet. In comes a 9 year old boy.

His mum is at the door waiting for him. She'll hear him if he shouts, or come looking for him if he isn't back in 5 minutes. Another man could come along at any point. Are those ideal raping circumstances?

Of course not. Far better to get a job as a scout leader or offer a lift to a child's friend or invite the neighbours son in for a piece of cake....

Public toilets are not a risky environment. The idea that they're the most dangerous place for young boys is absolute and complete nonsense.

I am beyond confused at the suggestion that an NT nine or ten year old boy would need to go to the bathroom with his mother! You all cannot be serious, can you?!

If an area's that dodgy, I'd stay well clear of it to begin with.

I respect what you're saying, I do, but I still feel that of all the situations my son goes into, for him personally, an unsupervised public toilet is the riskiest. The school does brilliant safeguarding education, at home we use the same messages, language etc. I really am 99.999% sure he is not at risk of abuse in his day to day life.

The same goes for DD, but I do think toilets with stalls present less risk than urinals.

And I know it's not likely that he'll be raped but I do know more than one bloke who's had an unpleasant encounter in the gents that lasted seconds rather than minutes.

I think 8 is a suitable age as a cut off.

And for those mothers hysterical about their sons being raped in the gents loos, with some saying that they would take their sons up to 12 in the loo with them, have they thought about it the other way round?

Although not in the loos, this attempted rape was by two 11 year olds. Although of course every mother would say their child would never do such a thing, our daughters need just as much protection as our sons. (And by protection, I don't just mean sexual assault, but given that so many girls may have started their periods by 9/10, they do start needing their privacy)

www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/aug/18/boys-attempted-rape-girl-eight-supervision-order

Just to answer why I am so annoyed...

Because these rules about the 'correct' changing rooms / toilets DO apply to my son with SN unfortunately and we are particularly affected by them because I am a single mother with a son

The reason exceptions cannot be made is because people like amother on this thread who complain when their girls have to share a changing room with him and I am not allowed in the men's with him, even during swimming lessons as it is a 'safeguarding issue'

My son doesn't have autistic tattoo'd on his head so you wouldn't know to make an exception - even if staff allow it... In addition he won't use a disabled loo as he is 'not disabled' as the picture on the door is of a wheelchair (got to love the mind of a child with autism).

So these rules affect us EVERY TIME we go out the door... He is unable to risk assess, he is unable to appropriately handle social interaction, he can not judge if something is a bit dodgy.

And me... Well I risk accusations and prosecutions if I ever need to rescue him from a men's toilet or changing room and I risk him being accused of sexually inappropriate behaviour if he goes in a female toilet or changing room.

It's a shocking shower of shite.

I do however have a mental map of unisex changing and decent loos... Positive in every situation

It's just not true. Far more likely for a new neighbour, friends dad, new coach etc. to be an abuser. That's a fact (ask the safeguarding person at school, they can give you the stats). The misconception that abusers are only to be found in toilets or dark alleyways is how they get away with it!

Good posts DayshiftDoris.

Perhaps all the mothers who are worried about their boys being unaccompanied in the Gents loos should accompany them into those loos to maintain their safety. If it is OK for a nearly teenage boy to be taken into the Ladies by his mum, why isn't it OK for her to stand just inside the door of the Gents to ensure his safety?

Itisallgoingtobefine....the nurseries have been told they will be charged to use the park. In all honesty, it's this aspect I am most concerned about. I had hoped that the thread title may stir up some interest in the proposals as a whole but think it has just brought focus on the toilet issue. My bad.

Just think its pretty sad that use of the parks is potentially going to be so heavily restricted. Not everyone has a garden, not every nursery has outdoor space and so many people use the parks for exercise, socialising etc. The nurseries pay their rates so why shouldn't they be able to use the parks. Yes GCC has no money but maybe rather than charging to use outdoor spaces they should be looking to tackle some of the reasons they have so little money.

Good point SDT. Well? Any comments?

If you'd have led with the nursery issue, I think you would have got a completely different response.

Charging nurseries to use the park is outrageous.

I'm totally with them on the toilet issue.

Nowhere in the proposals does it say nurseries will be charged - it just says they need to ask permission - permission that would doubtless be granted free of charge.

If a nursery wished to use the park as its primary venue, it is perfectly reasonable that it should pay to do so.

The nursery my daughter attends has been told that the plan is to charge 50 quid per day for access to the park. As a parent already paying a lot for childcare AND paying tax by working AND paying council tax, I have a pretty big issue with this because I very much doubt it is a cost that the nursery will bear!

Why is restrict children's access to parks? Glasgow is a city with a high level of childhood obesity (and adult obesity for that matter) and restricting access to green spaces is of no benefit to anyone.

Mothers can not take their son's into the men's toilets or changing room as it is considered a safeguarding concern....

I have been questioned when loitering outside the gents... It's not ideal, it doesn't really help keep him safe and I avoid it at all costs.

So it's not a solution at all - no more than it is a solution for a man to take his daughters to the ladies

weemee is it a private nursery? If so, charging seems fair enough.

A nursery shouldn't use the park as it's primary venue, but how is it fair to charge them for taking the kids to the park?!

Will they have to pay for use of the pavement on the way there as well?!

Nurseries also use the library, should they pay for that?

What about childminders, will they have to pay too?